从发现真实和保障人权角度论刑事证据中性规则

刑事诉讼中对证据的认定必须遵循一定的规则,而任何一种证据规则得以确立,必须具有自身的价值基础:要么能发现案件真实,要么能保障人权,或者两者兼具。我国理论界普遍主张以物证中心取代口供中心,认为这样有利于遏制刑讯逼供,保障人权。物证中心规则和口供中心规则都属于证据中心规则中的一种,都带有证据中心规则的先天缺陷。靠证据中心规则的自身嬗变,是很难克服其固有缺陷的。证据中性规则则为可取,它不承认证据的预断效力,主张任何证据的证明力,在接触案件之前都是不定的。

On the Neutral Rule of the Criminal Evidence from the Angle of Finding Truth and Safeguarding the Human Rights

The evidence cognizance in criminal suit must follow certain rules, but the establishment of any kind of evidence rule shall have its own value foundations: either can find the truth of a case, or can ensure human rights, or have both. The theoretical circle of our country generally maintains that the oral confession center should be replaced with the material evidence center for its benefits to contain the acts of extorting a confession by torture and ensure human rights. The rule centered on material evidence or oral confession belongs to a kind of rule of evidence center, and has regular congenital defects of rule of evidence center, so it is very difficult to overcome these defects only by the own transmutation of evidence center rule. Therefore, the neutral rule is more desirable. This evidence rule does not acknowledge the forejudging effectiveness of the evidence, advocating the testimonial power of any evidence is indefinite before contacting the case.